MATCH: Oxford City (A) 13/04/24

[yarddog73]

5 minutes ago, JoeP said:

 

I dunno - I don't think he can really win in interviews. Say everything's fine and he's blowing smoke up our arses. Says - accurately - that things aren't well and it's a bad move and demotivating. I don't think there's anything wrong with what he's said and the timing, which is when we're almost certainly not going to make the play-offs. 

 

Something needed to be said about these players. The changing room is not harmonious. The other option was to pretend everything's fine and nothing will change moving forward. 

 

As I say, we've signed a group of individuals, rather than a team. We need to address that. We need good characters, along side talent. I think Gardner is a good character to have around, Fondop is and Conlon is supposedly too. It it'll be a surprise to no one who I think is bottom of the list on that front!

I don't want lads who are good to have around I want winners who are solid footballers and good at their jobs, when the mindset changes we might get somewhere, we're not some sort of charity paying players wages who clog up treatment rooms or who looked fucked after 70 minutes as several did yesterday.

 

Nobody in that squad has deserved a new deal and I mean nobody, those who've got another year are lucky because there are few you'd keep if starting from scratch, honestly if the likes of Hope, Gardner, McGahey, etc.. are offered new deals I'll give up.

[oafc1955]

11 minutes ago, JoeP said:

we've signed a group of individuals

Which is just about what every team does in every league isn’t it?

The team bit comes afterwards when it is hoped that the players concerned complement the players you already have and can be integrated into a team.

[JoeP]

6 minutes ago, yarddog73 said:

I don't want lads who are good to have around I want winners who are solid footballers and good at their jobs, when the mindset changes we might get somewhere, we're not some sort of charity paying players wages who clog up treatment rooms or who looked fucked after 70 minutes as several did yesterday.

 

Nobody in that squad has deserved a new deal and I mean nobody, those who've got another year are lucky because there are few you'd keep if starting from scratch, honestly if the likes of Hope, Gardner, McGahey, etc.. are offered new deals I'll give up.

 

But we've got a group of solid footballers.  Every signing made, I can see why we've done it.  Previous promotion winners, Players of the Year and League One quality. But it isn't working.  It's a team we need.  You need quality - of course you do - but you need the right team spirit too.

[JoeP]

2 minutes ago, oafc1955 said:

Which is just about what every team does in every league isn’t it?

The team bit comes afterwards when it is hoped that the players concerned complement the players you already have and can be integrated into a team.

 

It appears we've relied heavily on stats (which seem to be working for York (the other club using Statbomb) as well for them as it does for us) and previous achievements have been the key factor when we're looking to bring players in. 

 

I think you need the right chemistry in the squad as well, though - there is no way that exists amongst this lot.. 

[AndyB2]

3 hours ago, JoeP said:

 

It appears we've relied heavily on stats (which seem to be working for York (the other club using Statbomb) as well for them as it does for us) and previous achievements have been the key factor when we're looking to bring players in. 

 

I think you need the right chemistry in the squad as well, though - there is no way that exists amongst this lot.. 

Without wishing to simplify it, at this level if you sign competent players and cover all positions, it should be enough to look like a team. 
 

i will say it again, this is not elite sport. Rules and philosophies which apply in the premier league don’t necessarily need to transfer to this level. 

[oafcmetty]

7 hours ago, GlossopLatic said:

 

Thar doesn't make the likes of Willoughby Tollit and Reid the answer.

It was Ethan Walker a few weeks ago, he'd change everything and be just what we need. He played a few games, was shite, and now he never mentions him.

[JoeP]

4 minutes ago, AndyB2 said:

Without wishing to simplify it, at this level if you sign competent players and cover all positions, it should be enough to look like a team. 
 

i will say it again, this is not elite sport. Rules and philosophies which apply in the premier league don’t necessarily need to transfer to this level. 

 

You're right there - which is why this "Statsbomb" nonsense needs scrapping.  It might work for Arsenal, but I can't believe it really tells you anything at this level.

 

You think about successful teams we've had in the past - they were all full of characters.  The late 80s/early 90s sides were full of them.  Paul Warne sticks in my head for some reason. You also had proper leaders like Duxbury and Gregan.  Dux in particular wasn't the most gifted footballer, but got stuck in every week and encouraged others to do the same.

 

I can't see anyone even nearly like that here.  I think it's irrelevant who the manager is, the dynamic just isn't right in the squad.

[GlossopLatic]

1 hour ago, JoeP said:

 

You're right there - which is why this "Statsbomb" nonsense needs scrapping.  It might work for Arsenal, but I can't believe it really tells you anything at this level.

 

You think about successful teams we've had in the past - they were all full of characters.  The late 80s/early 90s sides were full of them.  Paul Warne sticks in my head for some reason. You also had proper leaders like Duxbury and Gregan.  Dux in particular wasn't the most gifted footballer, but got stuck in every week and encouraged others to do the same.

 

I can't see anyone even nearly like that here.  I think it's irrelevant who the manager is, the dynamic just isn't right in the squad.

 

You appear to be assuming that the stats bomb is the problem without actually knowing how it works or even if we've used it, or used it properly to recruit players.

[JoeP]

2 minutes ago, GlossopLatic said:

 

You appear to be assuming that the stats bomb is the problem without actually knowing how it works or even if we've used it, or used it properly to recruit players.

 

Meh, I'm all ears (or eyes..) if you want to let me know how it works...

 

I'm just hypothesising. Recruitment's been crap, we've had a stats and recruitment department, we seem to have signed a lot of decent players on paper, who just haven't gelled.  Doesn't seem beyond the realms that we've looked at player stats, gone "he's got those stats, he's got those stats, lets sign them" without looking at the player as a character..

[GlossopLatic]

3 minutes ago, JoeP said:

 

Meh, I'm all ears (or eyes..) if you want to let me know how it works...

 

I'm just hypothesising. Recruitment's been crap, we've had a stats and recruitment department, we seem to have signed a lot of decent players on paper, who just haven't gelled.  Doesn't seem beyond the realms that we've looked at player stats, gone "he's got those stats, he's got those stats, lets sign them" without looking at the player as a character..

 

We know the recruitment hasn't delivered the bang for its buck that we'd hope that's what we know to be definite

 

But how can you conclude that it's the data anslysis/stats bomb that's wrong if you admit that you don't even know how it works. Who is to say it's not poor scouting, bad recommendations from agents, bad judging from team management?

 

 

[nzlatic]

The bulk of the squad were here under the old regime or were signed by Unsworth/Thompson. I’m inclined to think that’s more likely to be the main problem. 
 

We were shopping in the bargain basement pre Frank. Then Unsworth was tasked with something he hadn’t done before - build a promotion winning squad. Him and Thompson clashed a lot too didn’t they? So it’s not a stretch to see how that could have gone badly.

 

I’ve got a lot more faith in Mellon and Brabin doing the subsequent rebuild.

[JoeP]

58 minutes ago, GlossopLatic said:

 

We know the recruitment hasn't delivered the bang for its buck that we'd hope that's what we know to be definite

 

But how can you conclude that it's the data anslysis/stats bomb that's wrong if you admit that you don't even know how it works. Who is to say it's not poor scouting, bad recommendations from agents, bad judging from team management?

 

 

 

I don't - as I say (again), I'm hypothesising.

 

I'll also say again, I'm open to hearing about how Statsbomb works, put I'm going to make a fairly safe assumption that it's something to do with player stats.  The clue's in the name.  As we've also had/got a stats department, I'm going to suggest a lot of our signings are heavily based on stats - otherwise there'd be no point in the department existing.

 

Is the old-fashioned scouting still a thing?  I'm pretty sure I read somewhere it's not.  Neither is the manager driving the length and breadth of the country to watch a player they're interested in signing, as far as I'm aware.

 

I'm of the opinion that it should be the manager and the manager only who makes the call on signings as he's the one that's going to have to mould a team with them. So if we've got a stats department, recruitment department (previously Steve Thompson?) and the Coach/Manager with an influence, it seems like too many cooks to me and you end up with a scenario where the manager has to work with players he might not want, because other people have had an input. 

 

Edited April 14 by JoeP

[AndyB2]

6 minutes ago, JoeP said:

 

I don't - as I say (again), I'm hypothesising.

 

I'll also say again, I'm open to hearing about how Statsbomb works, put I'm going to make a fairly safe assumption that it's something to do with player stats.  The clue's in the name.  As we've also had/got a stats department, I'm going to suggest a lot of our signings are heavily based on stats - otherwise there'd be no point in the department existing.

 

Is the old-fashioned scouting still a thing?  I'm pretty sure I read somewhere it's not.  Neither is the manager driving the length and breadth of the country to watch a player they're interested in signing, as far as I'm aware.

 

I'm of the opinion that it should be the manager and the manager only who makes the call on signings as he's the one that's going to have to mould a team with them. So if we've got a stats department, recruitment department (previously Steve Thompson?) and the Coach/Manager with an input, it seems like too many cooks to me and you end up with a scenario where the manager has to work with players he might not want, because other people have had an input. 

The alarm bells were ringing for me when unsworth started going on about stats and players lounges. I mean all great having these things and am sure they add value somewhere but I’d have to question his priorities. It just strikes that one or two people have been like a kid in a sweet shop with franks money and treated it like a championship manager exercise.

[BradKnowles1]

The main problem I have with recruitment we don’t have one sellable asset. You go through the teams around us, they all have someone who they can sell on. 

[GlossopLatic]

7 minutes ago, JoeP said:

 

I don't - as I say (again), I'm hypothesising.

 

I'll also say again, I'm open to hearing about how Statsbomb works, put I'm going to make a fairly safe assumption that it's something to do with player stats.  The clue's in the name.  As we've also had/got a stats department, I'm going to suggest a lot of our signings are heavily based on stats - otherwise there'd be no point in the department existing.

 

Is the old-fashioned scouting still a thing?  I'm pretty sure I read somewhere it's not.  Neither is the manager driving the length and breadth of the country to watch a player they're interested in signing, as far as I'm aware.

 

I'm of the opinion that it should be the manager and the manager only who makes the call on signings as he's the one that's going to have to mould a team with them. So if we've got a stats department, recruitment department (previously Steve Thompson?) and the Coach/Manager with an input, it seems like too many cooks to me and you end up with a scenario where the manager has to work with players he might not want, because other people have had an input. 

 

Again I think you are assuming or as you put it hypothesising on what the problem is. FYI I'm guilty of coming to Conclusions without knowing all the information too so I'm not trying to come from a holier than thou position on this, it could well be that the stats bomb data analysis hasn't delivered what we hoped it would do.

 

The point Im making here which is critical here is that we learn the right lessons from this and understand exactly why we haven't got value for money based on the actual full evidence rather than any hypothesis.

 

Youve also got to look in which way the world is going. The one where you are suggesting the manager calls all the shots which the way the likes of Royle Ferguson and Clough no longer exists. Alot of the work is delegated out to people top clubs have an army of coaches data scientists fitness people recruitment people etc. The fact that all the successful clubs are doing this should leave a clue as to what we will need to do to be successful in the future. We can carry on doing what we've always done and praying that doing the same thing will lead to success when it hasn't done for 30 years or we can embrace change and understand that we need to look forwards rather than backwards.

 

Having come to Oldham for the last 30 years I've watched a team and a town that has been left further and further behind and their seems to be a lack of appetite at times to change things and embrace the future it's time we did that.

[GlossopLatic]

8 minutes ago, BradKnowles1 said:

The main problem I have with recruitment we don’t have one sellable asset. You go through the teams around us, they all have someone who they can sell on. 

 

Interesting point this and one I think we can relate to the fact that we have an old side. Of yesterday's starting 11 only 1 is under 24 that is Sachdev who isn't even our player. I think we need to start looking at young hungry players who can add energy to the team. 

 

I've said above about the need to embrace change and I very much stand by that but if we can learn one lesson from the past is that signing young hungry players possibly with a point to prove is something that works for us.

[JoeP]

27 minutes ago, GlossopLatic said:

 

Again I think you are assuming or as you put it hypothesising on what the problem is. FYI I'm guilty of coming to Conclusions without knowing all the information too so I'm not trying to come from a holier than thou position on this, it could well be that the stats bomb data analysis hasn't delivered what we hoped it would do.

 

The point Im making here which is critical here is that we learn the right lessons from this and understand exactly why we haven't got value for money based on the actual full evidence rather than any hypothesis.

 

Youve also got to look in which way the world is going. The one where you are suggesting the manager calls all the shots which the way the likes of Royle Ferguson and Clough no longer exists. Alot of the work is delegated out to people top clubs have an army of coaches data scientists fitness people recruitment people etc. The fact that all the successful clubs are doing this should leave a clue as to what we will need to do to be successful in the future. We can carry on doing what we've always done and praying that doing the same thing will lead to success when it hasn't done for 30 years or we can embrace change and understand that we need to look forwards rather than backwards.

 

Having come to Oldham for the last 30 years I've watched a team and a town that has been left further and further behind and their seems to be a lack of appetite at times to change things and embrace the future it's time we did that.

 

Yes, fair points there - the world's changing and we've got to change with it.  And we've got to review why things haven't worked out so far.

 

But how beneficial is the new way of working for lower league clubs?  We can't afford all the data scientists, fitness and recruitment people, etc.  Arsenal say, can however afford to hoover up dozens of players based on stats with the possibility of just one turning out to be a world-class player.  We can't.  We need to sign players that aren't risks (I know every player is a risk, etc..) yet have less resources to do it.

 

It's a different game down here - if we're in a position to evolve to the next level at some point, then I'm all for all the different departments and personnel, etc but we are where we are and I think it needs to be fairly streamlined.  It'd be interesting to see how the smaller clubs currently sat above us in the National League work when it comes to transfers - given it's only us and York that seem to be using Statbomb, for example.

 

While the world is changing, etc the human psyche hasn't changed beyond that for a team to work, it doesn't just need good participants, it needs good personalities too...

 

Edited April 14 by JoeP

[Boyyou]

36 minutes ago, BradKnowles1 said:

The main problem I have with recruitment we don’t have one sellable asset. You go through the teams around us, they all have someone who they can sell on. 

Hobson might be worth a small fee, even Sutton,.

[AndyB2]

5 minutes ago, JoeP said:

 

Yes, fair points there - the world's changing and we've got to change with it.  And we've got to review why things haven't worked out so far.

 

But how beneficial is the new way of working for lower league clubs?  We can't afford all the data scientists, fitness and recruitment people, etc.  Arsenal say, can however afford to hoover up dozens of players based on stats with the possibility of just one turning out to be a world-class player.  We can't.  We need to sign players that aren't risks (I know every player is a risk, etc..) yet have less resources to do it.

 

It's a different game down here - if we're in a position to evolve to the next level at some point, then I'm all for all the different departments and personnel, etc but we are where we are and I think it needs to be fairly streamlined.  It'd be interesting to see how the smaller clubs currently sat above us in the National League work when it comes to transfers - given it's only us and York that seem to be using Statbomb, for example.

 

While the world is changing, etc the human psyche hasn't changed beyond that for a team to work, it doesn't just need good participants, it needs good personalities too...

 

Ironic that the two clubs using stat bombs are the two biggest under achievers in the division (relative to size) this season.

 

It’s use may not be the problem but my word it’s added nothing. 

 

I simply can’t get over the quality of player we have recruited. 

[Dave_Og]

6 minutes ago, JoeP said:

 

Yes, fair points there - the world's changing and we've got to change with it.  And we've got to review why things haven't worked out so far.

 

But how beneficial is the new way of working for lower league clubs?  We can't afford all the data scientists, fitness and recruitment people, etc.  Arsenal say, can however afford to hoover up dozens of players based on stats with the possibility of just one turning out to be a world-class player.  We can't.  We need to sign players that aren't risks (I know every player is a risk, etc..) yet have less resources to do it.

 

It's a different game down here - if we're in a position to evolve to the next level at some point, then I'm all for all the different departments and personnel, etc but we are where we are and I think it needs to be fairly streamlined.  It'd be interesting to see how the smaller clubs currently sat above us in the National League work when it comes to transfers - given it's only us and York that seem to be using Statbomb, for example.

 

While the world is changing, etc the human psyche hasn't changed beyond that for a team to work, it doesn't just need good participants, it needs good personalities too...

 

 

 

Arssnal's scouting might be shown up to be hilariously inept this summer.  They are rumoured to be buying out Viktor Gyokeres' for €100m.  The same player who moved from Coventry last summer for a fifth of that.

[GlossopLatic]

28 minutes ago, JoeP said:

 

Yes, fair points there - the world's changing and we've got to change with it.  And we've got to review why things haven't worked out so far.

 

But how beneficial is the new way of working for lower league clubs?  We can't afford all the data scientists, fitness and recruitment people, etc.  Arsenal say, can however afford to hoover up dozens of players based on stats with the possibility of just one turning out to be a world-class player.  We can't.  We need to sign players that aren't risks (I know every player is a risk, etc..) yet have less resources to do it.

 

It's a different game down here - if we're in a position to evolve to the next level at some point, then I'm all for all the different departments and personnel, etc but we are where we are and I think it needs to be fairly streamlined.  It'd be interesting to see how the smaller clubs currently sat above us in the National League work when it comes to transfers - given it's only us and York that seem to be using Statbomb, for example.

 

While the world is changing, etc the human psyche hasn't changed beyond that for a team to work, it doesn't just need good participants, it needs good personalities too...

 

 

Absolutely it needs the right personalities I'm not advocating signing players purely off stats, for stats and data to be effective they need to be interpretated properly anyway. Their is still very much room for scouting. Thomas Frank at Brentford said that while they use data analysis they still very much use scouting by the eyes as he put it to identify talent.

 

As for can this work in the national league and the examples of ourselves and York being the only clubs using it suggest it doesn't. My arguement would be here is that aslong as you can collect the same amount of accurate data then their is no reason why it can't be a useful tool to help us find value for money signings. While only 2 clubs use it now its more likely than not that more and more clubs will use it going forwards as it becomes more accessible and more sophisticated. Its important to look at the future possibilities and not just the current results.

Edited April 14 by GlossopLatic

[Dave_Og]

26 minutes ago, GlossopLatic said:

 

Absolutely it needs the right personalities I'm not advocating signing players purely off stats, for stats and data to be effective they need to be interpretated properly anyway. Their is still very much room for scouting. Thomas Frank at Brentford said that while they use data analysis they still very much use scouting by the eyes as he put it to identify talent.

 

As for can this work in the national league and the examples of ourselves and York being the only clubs using it suggest it doesn't. My arguement would be here is that aslong as you can collect the same amount of accurate data then their is no reason why it can't be a useful tool to help us find value for money signings. While only 2 clubs use it now its more likely than not that more and more clubs will use it going forwards as it becomes more accessible and more sophisticated. Its important to look at the future possibilities and not just the current results.

 

Isn't it just that only two clubs use Statsbomb rather than only two clubs use stats.  Other brands are available...

[League one forever]

DR told us how it works- I think it was on the pod. 
 

It’s a vast database that allows you to quickly identify a position without needing to rely on scouting in the first instance. 
 

The club use it to generate a pool of possibilities and then the manager decides from that pool. (I’m presuming they then scout before the final decision) 

 

Mellon has said umpteen times- I know what a good player looks like. He keeps repeating it. He specifically said on Saturday-  I know what a good player looks like, and I know where they are. The inference is he doesn’t want to choose from a pool. He wants his picks only. 
 

If we look at the last 18 months, it’s unbelievable how we’ve ended up here.  
 

Stats bomb can’t identify a right back. 
 

It only generates centre halves and strikers. 
 

Or 

 

It’s only been used for some players and not others- (could explain the tension between ST and Unsy) and that’s why we’re left with multiple players in some positions and the bare bones or none in others. 
 

 

The biggest learning lesson in the summer is this- Mellon and the board have to agree on the recruitment. Either back him to get who he wants, or get a head coach that will work within what the club wants to do. Because at the minute it looks like everyone is pulling in different directions. 

 

 

 

[AndyB2]

1 hour ago, BradKnowles1 said:

The main problem I have with recruitment we don’t have one sellable asset. You go through the teams around us, they all have someone who they can sell on. 

I suppose hobson, lundsrum and Hammond should be that. But when you have had the season we have just had, your assets are not, by implication, very sellable. May change by the end of next season if these three kick on. But I have yet to see any serious signs that that will happen 

[GlossopLatic]

24 minutes ago, Dave_Og said:

 

Isn't it just that only two clubs use Statsbomb rather than only two clubs use stats.  Other brands are available...

 

Could well be I'm not sure if it is then it's something to think about certainly if other brands as you put it are being used and are working for other club's.